Diurnal cortisol secretion at home and in child care: a prospective study of 2‐year‐old toddlers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies indicate that children may experience disrupted cortisol secretion in child care. The extent to which this is a transient or long-term disruption is not known, as most studies have relied on cross-sectional designs, and age-heterogeneous small sample sizes. This study aims to (a) compare cortisol secretion measured at home and in child care at 2 and 3 years of age, (b) investigate cortisol changes from 2 to 3 years of age, (c) examine whether age at initiation of child care is associated with cortisol secretion, and (d) investigate whether cortisol secretion in child care is linked to behavioural problems. METHODS: Saliva samples were collected in a cohort of children recruited at 2 years of age from a larger population sample composed of women seen for the first time during pregnancy. Saliva was sampled twice a day (morning and afternoon) over two consecutive days at home and in child care at 2 (n = 155) and 3 years of age (n = 116). Interviews regarding the familial socioeconomic background and child care history were conducted with the mothers. RESULTS: At 2 years of age, children showed a flat diurnal cortisol pattern in child care and a decreasing pattern at home. At age 3 years, children showed decreasing patterns both at home and in child care. Also at 3 years, children with less child care experience (i.e., entry after 16 months) had higher cortisol levels in child care and lower levels at home. In contrast, those with more experience (i.e., entry prior to 8 months) had lower cortisol in child care and higher cortisol at home. CONCLUSION: The different patterns of diurnal secretion observed in child care as compared to home is transient for most children, diminishing as they get older, whereas home and child care overall levels later on may be influenced by the cumulated experience with child care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".